1. Gambling: Yes, the lockboxes are a form of "Gambling". This is a game. Technically, all games involve gambling. Note the words "game" and "gambling" themselves and you can see that they come from a common root. Gambling is the act of risking a resource for a chance at an uncertain reward. The resource being gambled with is not always money, but often just risking an in-game resource. Time or your "turn" in a game are some examples of other resources that you might gamble with. The outcome of any game is affected by random chance. In a game with a "house", the house always has the advantage. This is to be expected. So, saying that lockboxes are a form of gambling is not a legitimate argument against them in the context of a game. Saying that you personally do not see the merits of risking your own real-world currency is a valid argument. But not one that makes lockboxes inherently wrong. Just wrong for you.
This is a stretch. Just because the words "game" and "gambling" share an etymological root that does not make them the same thing. And if all games were "gambling" they wouldn't use the word "game" in the definition of "gambling" as in "games of chance for money/stakes". Gambling is (arguably*) a form of game. But games are not a form of gambling. That would be affirming the consequent, which is a fallacy.
MMOs are not games of chance since chance is not the driving factor in attaining "success" (when success is relevant at all, which may not always be the case in MMO activities, which in Cryptic games may even include working on costumes), but player skill and character power, and the rewards being sought is entertainment**, which is an ephemeral feeling with no monetary value (as opposed to a good/service--digital or otheriwse), and/or "game rewards" (i.e. gear, currency, etc.) which is a form of compensation--not a "gambling" reward. And in Cryptic's games, when it comes to engaging in PvE content, the player always has the advantage against the "house", because their games cater excessively to casual play and their content is very easy.
*it could simply mean "to place a bet" even if no game is being played
2. Fair: The contents of lockboxes are determined randomly. If we assume that the same RNG, no matter how flawed, is being used for all players who open one then they are by definition fair. Everyone expends an equal amount of resources in order to have an equal chance at an equal reward. Does everyone always get the best rewards? No. Are the odds of getting the best item in our favor as players? No. That is not equitable, but it is fair. Those two words are often mixed up today. Guaranteed equal opportunity is fairness. Guaranteed outcome where everyone eventually has the same results is boredom in a game (and tyranny in a society). Complaining that something random is unfair in a game driven by randomness and in fact based on the rolling of dice is ridiculous.
This is not what people mean when they use the word "fair" in the context of lockboxes and as such does not address what is actually being said. The subject of "fairness" in regards to lockboxes and other gambling items typically comes in regards to limiting gambling as the only means to get those items, or because of the value they offer in exchange for the potential cost of getting what's inside them, compared to the normal cost of getting equivalent digital items or even entire non-sub-based video games in general.
3. Greed: This is a word that gets tossed around out of ignorance so much that it has no real meaning. Businesses exist to make a profit. So many people have had their worldview twisted into some strange parody of reality wherein profit and success are bad or unfair. They actually believe that wealth is not created and earned but simply distributed like slices of a pie. No. *snip*
This argument gets tossed around a lot but no one is disputing that game companies are businesses or that they exist to make profit.
Also, while I don't want to get in deep on this particular topic and think it goes beyond the scope of this discussion, wealth is both generated AND divided like a pie. Often, its the people that work the hardest and/or contribute the most towards making that wealth possible (such as by creating/providing the actual product/service) that get the smallest piece (though, that is not necessarily always the case). The usual name for that slice is "salary", and it's not always (I'd dare even say "usually") divided equitably or based on merit, performance or contribution.
The bottom line is that they exist because they are more profitable than simply placing items up for sale. People on the internet like to be special unique snowflakes just like everyone else. They want to display things that most others don't have. The randomness of lockboxes makes this more possible. Lockboxes combine the appeal of the item themselves with the fun of gambling and the ego of having something most other players don't. They are a shameless marketing ploy designed to take advantage of human psychology and maximize profits. Shameless, because there is nothing there to be ashamed of.
The highlighted part is an oft-repeated assumption that does not necessarily has a basis on reality. Personally, I could care less about being a "unique snowflake" that wants to "display things that most others don't have". When I buy a new costume set or travel power (mounts in NWO) in CO, it is strictly about having more cosmetic options, particularly some that I may need to achieve a certain look for my character. And I am not the only one that thinks like that or has that type of motivation in regards to those items--it is pretty much standard practice in CO and most games with detailed cosmetic options in general.
People don't normally want cosmetic items to rub them in someone else's face. They want them to have options when working on their character's appearance and/or to achieve a specific look or fit a certain theme. If 100% of the game's population also has access to them I could care less. I just want something that fits my character.
Could there be people that think like that? Maybe. But it depends on the context (in some games, it might be more relevant to "have something others don't" than others if such items are offered as a sort of exclusive achievement--but that is NOT what Cryptic games are about), and I believe that there's more people making this argument than there are people that actually think that way, or have that as primary motivation (or even a motivation at all) for wanting those items.
Also, there's plenty to be ashamed of in taking advantage of human psychology for personal gain at their expense. Particularly when the real human psychology they're taking advange of is not their vanity, but their inability to associate the small expense of $1 single dollar with potentially ending up spending $100.
Because if you have 100,000 people paying $15 dollars a month on a sub you are making 1.5 million a month. However if you have 100,000 people playing your game and it is free to play and 80,000 (for whatever reason) of those people are not paying you any money at all you still need to come up with the 1.5 mil a month from the other 20,000 people. Regardless of how many freeloaders are not paying any money you still need to cover all your costs. From experience I would bet a Cryptics f2p game is in the neighborhood of 20% of people paying for 100% of the expenses and 80% of the people paying nothing because they refuse to spend money on a "free to play game" no matter what the cost. Of those 20% that are paying, most likely 50% of them never pay more that $10-$20 a month. So 10% of people are supporting the lions share of the costs and paying huge amounts of money. This is why prices are what they are. Specialty items in ALL walks of life are far more expensive.
All of which to me just highlights where F2P fails. Because it expects paying costumers to pay a disproportionally high amount just so that leeches will play for free. But I still believe that there have to be better ways to make a profit on a F2P game, and that this business model is still on its infancy (at least in the west), so its still on the process of finding its way and establishing what will work or not on the longrun. This might be working now, but I have to wonder if the paying players will be consistently willing to pay such huge sum several years from now. Personally I'm getting fed up of being expected to pay substantially more so that people that dont pay can play for free.
If you are including server expenses under maintenance you have been lied to. I work for a company that maintains servers for our "product" and server expenses cost more than our payroll. One of the biggest costs in maintaining those servers is electricity. It is STAGGERING how much money in electricity costs there are for running a server farm 24/7/365. There are companies in the US paying more than most 3rd world countries GNP in electricity costs for their server farms.
In this I stand corrected is that is the case, since I don't really have the relevant data.
When there were only sub games people bitched about the cost of subs.
Now, they <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> about being expected to pay several times more than they ever did on the sub model if they want to financially contribute to the company so that freeloaders can play for free
I hate, hate the lockbox... they say (in STO and CO) that they don't effect the normal loot drops, normal loot still drops normally, no more or no less.. but I just can't truly believe that deep down..
Like keirkin said, I would love to have an option so I never have to see them drop at all, if they are truly on a separate loot system then it should be possible to turn them off and never have to look at or delete them out of my inventory again.. .
Yeah, I can't say that I believe that either. i have over 600 lock boxes in the bank in champions and I have only played for 2 months. I would say almost half the drops are lockboxes and the drops don't seem to happen any more than they do in any other game. I have seen a lot of games use lock boxes but I have never seen as many lockboxes as I have seen in champions. In fact, I don't think I have seen half as many lockboxes in all other games that I have ever seen them in, combined as I have seen in champs this last two months.
I could care less about being a "unique snowflake" that wants to "display things that most others don't have".
Really really really sorry, but OCD pet peeve is making me say this. "Could not" or "couldn't" care less. Not "could" care less. Unless of course you really meant that being a "unique snowflake" was important to you. Again sorry it is like using "irregardless" and using the word "irony" wrong drives me nuts.
People don't normally want cosmetic items to rub them in someone else's face. They want them to have options when working on their character's appearance and/or to achieve a specific look or fit a certain theme. If 100% of the game's population also has access to them I could care less. I just want something that fits my character.
Could there be people that think like that? Maybe. But it depends on the context (in some games, it might be more relevant to "have something others don't" than others if such items are offered as a sort of exclusive achievement--but that is NOT what Cryptic games are about), and I believe that there's more people making this argument than there are people that actually think that way, or have that as primary motivation (or even a motivation at all) for wanting those items.
While I agree for clothing/armor I think that mounts are a major exception. People preen and e-peen about mounts all the time and they are a status item to many.
Also, there's plenty to be ashamed of in taking advantage of human psychology for personal gain at their expense. Particularly when the real human psychology they're taking advange of is not their vanity, but their inability to associate the small expense of $1 single dollar with potentially ending up spending $100.
I find it funny that you insinuate taking advantage of someones vanity is kinda ok, but taking advantage of someones stupidity is not. If you think using psychology for personal gain is wrong, you are going to have to start a much larger crusade. There is no part of a modern democratic capitalistic society that is not using psychology for personal gain. Every add campaign for anything from a crappy little kids toy to the president of the united states uses psychology for personal gain weather it is money or power.
All of which to me just highlights where F2P fails. Because it expects paying costumers to pay a disproportionally high amount just so that leeches will play for free. But I still believe that there have to be better ways to make a profit on a F2P game, and that this business model is still on its infancy (at least in the west), so its still on the process of finding its way and establishing what will work or not on the longrun. This might be working now, but I have to wonder if the paying players will be consistently willing to pay such huge sum several years from now. Personally I'm getting fed up of being expected to pay substantially more so that people that dont pay can play for free.
Unfortunately it won't fail, it will flourish because some people will spend shitloads of money on what they want. Hell just look at a piece of modern art (white field with a red dot or line down the center) MILLIONS of dollars, super high end cars at $150k+, people spending $5k+ on a single sporting event ticket. You can scream at the wind about it all you want, it is all the same, it will not change, so the f2p model will only grow. The ONLY way to stop it is if people stop paying, and as stated above, that is not going to happen.
Now, they <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> about being expected to pay several times more than they ever did on the sub model if they want to financially contribute to the company so that freeloaders can play for free
I totally agree, but my point was that people are going to <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> about cost no matter what it is. If it was a $1 monthly fee people would <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> that they can get other MMOs for free, why the hell should the pay that $1 it is totally outrageous!!!!!!
I think is a good feature to get money out of the game without impacting the rest of it, so you can destroy them if you don't want to get into that "game", or just open one every now and then for free by doing in-game stuff to get the virtual coins they require
A checkbox to disable them, would be handy, but you would eventually forget about them, which is not good for the business so I wouldn't expect to see that happening
When there were only sub games people bitched about the cost of subs.
I didn't say others wouldn't <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>, just that I like subs better for reasons like this.
I've found a lot of people don't like subs because their put out cancelling and pay when they aren't playing... oh the things we consider work these days. Others just can't count on $15 every month, I'm assuming those are mostly kids that have to check with their parents.
0
castagyreMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 4Arc User
edited February 2013
It doesn't matter if the game has a sub or not. Cash shops didn't appear only when subs went away. If some companies think they can make money on something like lock boxes they'll shove them in the game sub or not. The payment model is irrelevant if the company running the game lacks integrity and the players have open wallets. They'll milk you either way.
Remembering Hanlon's Razor can save one a lot on aspirines.
I think is a good feature to get money out of the game without impacting the rest of it
It depends on the game and I won't say this game is affected hugely or not. But it can fall under PTW. If one doesn't drop a dollar to open these boxes for potentially "better loot", aka better player, aka if the game has PvP there is then a possible advantage to having better loot. Where another drops a lot of cash to open their boxes and out gears others that don't, they go face to face in PvP and the person who dropped the dough wins... That I suspect is PTW. Somewhat indirect, but money does buy you better odds at better gear, no?
I don't see this being a personal issue of mine, but others may.
It doesn't matter if the game has a sub or not. Cash shops didn't appear only when subs went away. If some companies think they can make money on something like lock boxes they'll shove them in the game sub or not. The payment model is irrelevant if the company running the game lacks integrity and the players have open wallets. They'll milk you either way.
Yes sub games eventually started offering cash shops as well. Do we have any with subs and lock boxes? I'm not sure I've played one.
0
castagyreMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 4Arc User
So they are going to add the most Non-Neverwinter item in exsistance to the game. Figures.
By non-Neverwinter do you mean not like Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2(not to be confused with Neverwinter Nights from AOL.) If so, this game is not a sequel to these games, and what those games did should have nothing to do with this game except that they are all games set in and around the D&D Forgotten Realms campaign setting city of Neverwinter.
If you instead mean non-D&D like, I would direct your attention to one of the most iconic items in D&D the Deck of Many Things(which incidentally usually comes in a box) an extreme form of in game gambling.
My problem with the lockbox is that I find it to be an obnoxious business practice that attempts to squeeze blood from a stone, it's all that <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> from those Korean made cash grabs that I just don't want to see or deal with anywhere, ever.
Now let me play devil's advocate and say that I actually don't mind the concept of "pay 2 win" after all, if I pay to support the developer, why shouldn't I get more than some 12 year old kid who's just eating up server space and contributing nothing? Why shouldn't I get more than that person? He doesn't like it? Tough bricks, he's playing for free. Sure we'd be on an uneven footing just because I had money to spend, but keep in mind a decade ago he wouldn't even have been able to play because he's a broke little kid with no money.
I can understand the reasons for not liking pay to win as an option, but in the end it doesn't actually bother me these days.
You are free to define words as you choose, but that does not make your definition valid. Gambling is the act of wagering resources on an uncertain outcome, which certainly describes the lockbox system. You pay money, this is where you are wagering resources, to open a lockbox containing a random item, which is the uncertain outcome. Whether you are guaranteed something or not is irrelevant; it is a game of chance, plain and simple.
So any financial investment without a guaranteed and explicitly spelled out rate of return is gambling? Ok time to shut down the US because 90% of our countries economy is gambling and gambling is the devil. We need to pass a law stopping all small businesses from opening, because that is gambling, we need to shoot all those stock market people because they are totally gambling (ok so I may agree with this point ), Schools, we need to shut down all school systems because those are gambling. Everyone one of these things fit YOUR defintion of gambling. You are free to define words as you choose, but that does not make your definition valid.
[gam-bling]
noun
1.
the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2.
the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly
When there were only sub games people bitched about the cost of subs.
Well they actually complained about how much more they were entitled to based on the fact that they paid for a sub to the game. Some whiners are still doing that very thing to this day which is quite sad. Subs are a thing of the past unless you are into Panda Land.
Well they actually complained about how much more they were entitled to based on the fact that they paid for a sub to the game. Some whiners are still doing that very thing to this day which is quite sad. Subs are a thing of the past unless you are into Panda Land.
Yes they did that TOO, but people also bitched that $9.99 was a ripoff and they should not have to pay a monthly fee for a game they already bought back in the EQ days. This has continued on to the present.
0
castagyreMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 4Arc User
Pay for win!!, really do you want another pay for win?
Learn of league of legends, you can do a big game and make money and you don
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited May 2013
The dark figure enters the room and covers his nose. I smell zombies. Necromancers. Defilers... He draws his twin blades and rushes at the zombie and after one expertly aimed strike it drops.
If a thread is over thirty days old it is dead. Please start a new one if you wish to continue the topic.
Comments
When there were only sub games people bitched about the cost of subs.
This is a stretch. Just because the words "game" and "gambling" share an etymological root that does not make them the same thing. And if all games were "gambling" they wouldn't use the word "game" in the definition of "gambling" as in "games of chance for money/stakes". Gambling is (arguably*) a form of game. But games are not a form of gambling. That would be affirming the consequent, which is a fallacy.
MMOs are not games of chance since chance is not the driving factor in attaining "success" (when success is relevant at all, which may not always be the case in MMO activities, which in Cryptic games may even include working on costumes), but player skill and character power, and the rewards being sought is entertainment**, which is an ephemeral feeling with no monetary value (as opposed to a good/service--digital or otheriwse), and/or "game rewards" (i.e. gear, currency, etc.) which is a form of compensation--not a "gambling" reward. And in Cryptic's games, when it comes to engaging in PvE content, the player always has the advantage against the "house", because their games cater excessively to casual play and their content is very easy.
*it could simply mean "to place a bet" even if no game is being played
This is not what people mean when they use the word "fair" in the context of lockboxes and as such does not address what is actually being said. The subject of "fairness" in regards to lockboxes and other gambling items typically comes in regards to limiting gambling as the only means to get those items, or because of the value they offer in exchange for the potential cost of getting what's inside them, compared to the normal cost of getting equivalent digital items or even entire non-sub-based video games in general.
This argument gets tossed around a lot but no one is disputing that game companies are businesses or that they exist to make profit.
Also, while I don't want to get in deep on this particular topic and think it goes beyond the scope of this discussion, wealth is both generated AND divided like a pie. Often, its the people that work the hardest and/or contribute the most towards making that wealth possible (such as by creating/providing the actual product/service) that get the smallest piece (though, that is not necessarily always the case). The usual name for that slice is "salary", and it's not always (I'd dare even say "usually") divided equitably or based on merit, performance or contribution.
The highlighted part is an oft-repeated assumption that does not necessarily has a basis on reality. Personally, I could care less about being a "unique snowflake" that wants to "display things that most others don't have". When I buy a new costume set or travel power (mounts in NWO) in CO, it is strictly about having more cosmetic options, particularly some that I may need to achieve a certain look for my character. And I am not the only one that thinks like that or has that type of motivation in regards to those items--it is pretty much standard practice in CO and most games with detailed cosmetic options in general.
People don't normally want cosmetic items to rub them in someone else's face. They want them to have options when working on their character's appearance and/or to achieve a specific look or fit a certain theme. If 100% of the game's population also has access to them I could care less. I just want something that fits my character.
Could there be people that think like that? Maybe. But it depends on the context (in some games, it might be more relevant to "have something others don't" than others if such items are offered as a sort of exclusive achievement--but that is NOT what Cryptic games are about), and I believe that there's more people making this argument than there are people that actually think that way, or have that as primary motivation (or even a motivation at all) for wanting those items.
Also, there's plenty to be ashamed of in taking advantage of human psychology for personal gain at their expense. Particularly when the real human psychology they're taking advange of is not their vanity, but their inability to associate the small expense of $1 single dollar with potentially ending up spending $100.
All of which to me just highlights where F2P fails. Because it expects paying costumers to pay a disproportionally high amount just so that leeches will play for free. But I still believe that there have to be better ways to make a profit on a F2P game, and that this business model is still on its infancy (at least in the west), so its still on the process of finding its way and establishing what will work or not on the longrun. This might be working now, but I have to wonder if the paying players will be consistently willing to pay such huge sum several years from now. Personally I'm getting fed up of being expected to pay substantially more so that people that dont pay can play for free.
In this I stand corrected is that is the case, since I don't really have the relevant data.
Now, they <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> about being expected to pay several times more than they ever did on the sub model if they want to financially contribute to the company so that freeloaders can play for free
Yeah, I can't say that I believe that either. i have over 600 lock boxes in the bank in champions and I have only played for 2 months. I would say almost half the drops are lockboxes and the drops don't seem to happen any more than they do in any other game. I have seen a lot of games use lock boxes but I have never seen as many lockboxes as I have seen in champions. In fact, I don't think I have seen half as many lockboxes in all other games that I have ever seen them in, combined as I have seen in champs this last two months.
All die, so die well.
Really really really sorry, but OCD pet peeve is making me say this. "Could not" or "couldn't" care less. Not "could" care less. Unless of course you really meant that being a "unique snowflake" was important to you. Again sorry it is like using "irregardless" and using the word "irony" wrong drives me nuts.
While I agree for clothing/armor I think that mounts are a major exception. People preen and e-peen about mounts all the time and they are a status item to many.
I find it funny that you insinuate taking advantage of someones vanity is kinda ok, but taking advantage of someones stupidity is not. If you think using psychology for personal gain is wrong, you are going to have to start a much larger crusade. There is no part of a modern democratic capitalistic society that is not using psychology for personal gain. Every add campaign for anything from a crappy little kids toy to the president of the united states uses psychology for personal gain weather it is money or power.
Unfortunately it won't fail, it will flourish because some people will spend shitloads of money on what they want. Hell just look at a piece of modern art (white field with a red dot or line down the center) MILLIONS of dollars, super high end cars at $150k+, people spending $5k+ on a single sporting event ticket. You can scream at the wind about it all you want, it is all the same, it will not change, so the f2p model will only grow. The ONLY way to stop it is if people stop paying, and as stated above, that is not going to happen.
I totally agree, but my point was that people are going to <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> about cost no matter what it is. If it was a $1 monthly fee people would <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> that they can get other MMOs for free, why the hell should the pay that $1 it is totally outrageous!!!!!!
A checkbox to disable them, would be handy, but you would eventually forget about them, which is not good for the business so I wouldn't expect to see that happening
I didn't say others wouldn't <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>, just that I like subs better for reasons like this.
I've found a lot of people don't like subs because their put out cancelling and pay when they aren't playing... oh the things we consider work these days. Others just can't count on $15 every month, I'm assuming those are mostly kids that have to check with their parents.
It depends on the game and I won't say this game is affected hugely or not. But it can fall under PTW. If one doesn't drop a dollar to open these boxes for potentially "better loot", aka better player, aka if the game has PvP there is then a possible advantage to having better loot. Where another drops a lot of cash to open their boxes and out gears others that don't, they go face to face in PvP and the person who dropped the dough wins... That I suspect is PTW. Somewhat indirect, but money does buy you better odds at better gear, no?
I don't see this being a personal issue of mine, but others may.
Yes sub games eventually started offering cash shops as well. Do we have any with subs and lock boxes? I'm not sure I've played one.
Only 'freemium' games that I'm aware of like CO and DC.
By non-Neverwinter do you mean not like Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2(not to be confused with Neverwinter Nights from AOL.) If so, this game is not a sequel to these games, and what those games did should have nothing to do with this game except that they are all games set in and around the D&D Forgotten Realms campaign setting city of Neverwinter.
If you instead mean non-D&D like, I would direct your attention to one of the most iconic items in D&D the Deck of Many Things(which incidentally usually comes in a box) an extreme form of in game gambling.
Neverwinter Official Wiki - http://neverwinter.gamepedia.com/
There are many items that acted like a random delivery of good/bad/or-indifferent items/events/spells.
Oh damn! Silvergryph just dropped SCIENCE!
Fantastic post, man. I enjoyed it!
Hey, could you "comment on" the overuse/misuse of Pay-To-Win next? I'd love to see you deconstruct that recurring anthem of the whiners, too.
Now let me play devil's advocate and say that I actually don't mind the concept of "pay 2 win" after all, if I pay to support the developer, why shouldn't I get more than some 12 year old kid who's just eating up server space and contributing nothing? Why shouldn't I get more than that person? He doesn't like it? Tough bricks, he's playing for free. Sure we'd be on an uneven footing just because I had money to spend, but keep in mind a decade ago he wouldn't even have been able to play because he's a broke little kid with no money.
I can understand the reasons for not liking pay to win as an option, but in the end it doesn't actually bother me these days.
So any financial investment without a guaranteed and explicitly spelled out rate of return is gambling? Ok time to shut down the US because 90% of our countries economy is gambling and gambling is the devil. We need to pass a law stopping all small businesses from opening, because that is gambling, we need to shoot all those stock market people because they are totally gambling (ok so I may agree with this point
[gam-bling]
noun
1.
the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2.
the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly
EQ2 had a cash shop when it was p2p.
Well they actually complained about how much more they were entitled to based on the fact that they paid for a sub to the game. Some whiners are still doing that very thing to this day which is quite sad. Subs are a thing of the past unless you are into Panda Land.
Yes they did that TOO, but people also bitched that $9.99 was a ripoff and they should not have to pay a monthly fee for a game they already bought back in the EQ days. This has continued on to the present.
A cash shop, yes, but no lock boxes.
Learn of league of legends, you can do a big game and make money and you don
He draws his twin blades and rushes at the zombie and after one expertly aimed strike it drops.
If a thread is over thirty days old it is dead. Please start a new one if you wish to continue the topic.